2
The Attachment Relationship  “Almost every infant will develop an affective tie with a caregiver, and will endeavor to use that caregiver as a source of comfort and reassurance in the face of challenges or threats from the environment” Weinfield, Sroufe, Egeland & Carlson, 1999

3
Individual Differences  Reflect differences in the child’s history of care  Differences cannot be attributed solely to the infant or to the caregiver but reflect the patterns of interaction across the history of care Weinfield, Sroufe, Egeland & Carlson, 1999

4
Development of Attachment  Biological process  Recognition of the caregiver  Utilization of the caregiver as a “haven of safety” and a “secure base” in order to explore the environment

5
Secure Base  The infant returns to the secure base for protection and comfort in the light of any threatening or distressing event  Bowlby and Ainsworth felt that there is a delicate balance between exploration and seeking proximity

7
Secure vs Insecure Attachment  The classifications “Secure” vs “Insecure” “Reflect the infant’s apparent perception of the availability of the caregiver if a need for comfort or protection should arise, and the organization of the infant’s responses to the caregiver in light of those perceptions of availability.” Weinfield et al (1999)

8
Secure Attachment  The caregiver is perceived as a reliable source of protection and comfort

9
Secure Attachment  When I am close to my loved one I feel good, when I am far away I am anxious, sad or lonely  Attachment is mediated by looking, hearing, and holding  When I’m held I feel warm, safe, and comforted  Results in a relaxed state so that one can, again, begin to explore Holmes (1993)

10
Secure Attachment  Promote exploration of the environment  Expand mastery of the environment  “I can explore with confidence because I know my caregiver will be available if I become anxious.”  The infant gains confidence in his or her own interactions with the world Weinfield et al (1999)

11
Secure Attachment  Attachment is a reciprocal relationship  The parent offers caregiving behavior that matches the attachment behavior of the child  The child, using social referencing, checks in with the mother “looking for cues that sanction exploration or withdrawal” Holmes (1993)

14
Anxious Attachment  Shows overt aggression toward the inconsistent mother  “Don’t you dare do that again!” but has to cling because he knows from experience that she will. Holmes (1993)

15
Internal Working Model  “Through a history of responsive care, infants will evolve expectations of their caregivers’ likely responses to signs of distress or other signals of the desire for contact”  Bowlby believed that, “What infants expect is what happened before.” Weinfield et al (1999)

16
Impact of the Internal Working Model The model governs how children feel toward each parent and about themselves, how they expect to be treated and how they plan their own behavior toward their parent

17
Internal Working Model  Anxious infants learn to see the world as: Unpredictable Insensitive The self does not deserve better treatment  These beliefs are carried forward to new relationships and new experiences Weinfield et al (1999)

18
Internal Working Model  “When the expectation of being hurt, disappointed, and afraid is carried forward to new relationships, the anxious infant becomes an angry, aggressive child.” Weinfield et al (1999)

19
Bowlby  “The working models a child builds of his mother and her ways of communicating and behaving towards him, and a comparable model of his father, together with the complementary models of himself in interaction with each, are being built by a child during the first few years of life and become established as influential cognitive models.

20
Bowlby  The model of himself that he builds reflects also the images that his parents have of him, images that are communicated not only by how each treats him but by what each says to him.

21
Bowlby  The IWM governs how he feels toward each parent and about himself, how he expects each of them to treat him, and how he plans his own behavior towards them. They govern too both the fears and the wishes expressed in his day dreams

22
Bowlby  The IWM of a parent and self in interaction tend to persist  The IWM comes to operate at an unconscious level  As child grows older and parents treat him differently there is a gradual updating of the IWM

23
Bowlby  But for the anxiously attached child Updating is obstructed through defensive exclusion of discrepant experience and information Patterns of interaction are habitual, generalized, and largely unconscious They persist uncorrected and unchanged even when dealing with persons who treat him differently from his parents

24
Jeremy Holmes  Defensive Exclusion Ways in which unwanted painful feelings and thoughts are kept out of awareness and the consequent restrictions to IWM’s and therefore, adaptability The IWM is a more cognitive construct than the psychoanalytic “internal world” Couples are attracted if there is a fit between their own IWM and that of the other

25
Solomon & George  When attachment behaviors such as searching, calling, and crying persistently fail to regain the figure, the child is forced to marshal defensive strategies that exclude this painful information from consciousness.

26
Solomon & George  Defensive exclusion of attachment is complete when the child’s attachment system and the feelings associated with it are strongly and chronically activated but not assuaged.

27
Bowlby  For a relationship between any two individuals to proceed harmoniously each must be aware of the other’s point of view, goals, feelings, and intentions, and each must adjust his own behavior so that some alignment of goals is negotiated.  This requires accurate models of self that are regularly updated by free communication

28
Bowlby  A child’s self-model is profoundly influenced by how his mother sees and treats him, whatever she fails to recognize in him he is likely to fail to recognize in himself.  Major parts of his personality can become split off from those parts that his mother recognizes and responds to, which may include features she attributes to him wrongly

29
Peter Fonagy  A key developmental attainment of the IWM is the creation of a processing system for the self (and significant others) in terms of a set of stable and generalized intentional attributes, such as desires, emotions, intentions, and beliefs, inferred from recurring invariant patterns in the history of previous interactions.

30
Peter Fonagy  The child is able to use the representational system to predict the other’s or the self’s behavior in conjunction with local, more transient intentional states inferred from a given situation.

31
Judith Solomon & Carol George  Under child rearing conditions in which the child feels lovable and protected (mirrored by representations of the attachment figure as one who will and can provide care), representational models of self and attachment figure are reasonably aligned

32
Solomon & George  When child feels unwanted and unlovable (mirrored by representations of the attachment figure as one who cannot care for or rejects the child), representational models reflect a complex interplay of multiple representations of self and other that are to some degree incompatible and difficult to integrate

33
Solomon & George  The child attempts to avoid negative appraisals of self and other that might otherwise dominate consciousness and bring emotional pain if they were thought by the child to be accurate or “real” evaluations.

34
Bowlby  A therapist applying attachment theory sees his role as: Providing the conditions in which the patient can explore his representational models of himself and his attachment figures Helping the patient reappraise and restructure the models in the light of new understanding

35
Bowlby  Five therapeutic roles Provide a secure base Help the patient consider ways in which he engages with significant relationships Encourage exploration of the therapist- patient relationship Consider how perceptions are a product of childhood relationships Recognize that past images may no longer be appropriate

About project

Feedback

To ensure the functioning of the site, we use cookies. We share information about your activities on the site with our partners and Google partners: social networks and companies engaged in advertising and web analytics. For more information, see the Privacy Policy and Google Privacy &amp Terms.
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.